Click here if you don’t see subscription options
Respectful Appreciation
In Aquinas in Africa (2/6), Thomas F. O’Meara, O.P., suggests that an African attitude toward technology and economic growth will influence how Africans think about Christianity. When I read this statement, it seemed to me that the opposite was true: that one’s fuller understanding of Christianity would influence how one regards technology and economic growth. In ordinary parlance, technology and economic growth are equated with progresswhich is never very well defined.
It is fairly clear that current technology is not harmonious with the earth’s processes. We are using the gifts of the earth at an unsustainable rate, which is not only unwise and inequitable, but also an affront to the creator who bestowed them. Is the author implying that the African attitude toward technology and economic growthand presumably toward progressis innately closer to a respectful appreciation and utilization of earth’s treasures than is often accepted? People close to the earth do seem to have a deeper understanding and bond with creation.
Dean Brackley, S.J., well points out in the same issue that while contemporary society [offers students] jobs, the only vocation it seems to propose is getting and spending. It is in our Christian faith that we are taught the vocation to love and serve.
The message of the Gospel, then, should inform the technological and economic strategies that humanity employsin Africa and elsewhere.
Sheila Murphy, O.S.U.
Who Owns What?
Forgive me if I am confused on the current question of who owns and/or controls assets of Catholic parishes. Two items in the Signs of the Times section (2/6) seem to express contrasting viewpoints on this issue.
First, Archbishop John G. Vlazny of Portland, Ore., asserts that the archdiocese has no authority to seize parish property or assets to satisfy claims against the archdiocese.
Second, the Vatican has denied appeals from members of parishes that were closed by Archbishop Sean P. O’Malley, O.F.M.Cap., of Boston. While there were other reasons given for these closings, the financial distress of the Archdiocese of Boston is an underlying cause. Did the parishes and the parishioners receive the benefits from disposing of these assets, which were claimed without their consent?
The Wall Street Journal of Dec. 20, 2005, reports the situation of St. Stanislaus Kostka parish in St. Louis, which has been placed under an edict because the parish board will not turn its assets over to Archbishop Raymond L. Burke to be under his control. These assets reportedly include a cash fund of some $9 million.
Do the parishioners, who have paid for parish assets, have control except when the local bishop wants those assets? It seems to me that the bishops are working both sides of the street.
John L. Coakley Jr.
